Reliability: Managing Emerging Challenges and Risks Michael Pohland DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for Public Release. Distribution is unlimited.
2
Reliability Impact on the Department of Defense • Operations and support costs represent 60% or more of total weapon life cycle costs • Reliability drives much of that cost (maintenance and spares) • Reliability is a common contributor to the schedule delays for our biggest weapon system programs • 10% improvement in reliability for a major defense program can equate to billions of dollars in savings over the life cycle • Failure puts soldiers in harms way 3
Designing something that won’t break when used is easy….Right? 4
Five Areas Essential for Successfully Managing Challenges and Risk • Designing reliability in up-front • Developing contracts that promote emphasis on Reliability and Maintainability (RAM) design practices • Leveraging data and information to the maximum extent possible • Establishing solid reliability growth (improvement) strategies • Linking maintenance data to product support strategies 5
Designing Reliability in Up-front • Mitigate potential sources of failure • Quickly develop solutions for failures • Positively impact design Full-system Dynamics Modeling provides tremendous insights that reduce testing and eliminate failures 6
Designing Reliability in Up-front Electronics in an Army Hand Held Device Thermal Analysis Design after Physics-of- Initial Design Provided Failure Vibrations Analysis Additional Insights This Circuit Board Fails Due This Circuit Board Does Not to Vibration (just by adding two screws) Design modification costing almost nothing changes product from being unreliable to reliable 7
Developing Contracts that Promote Emphasis on RAM Design Practices In some cases, we contract for little System 1 Demonstrated more than a specification target and System 2 Prediction System 3 ask for a reliability prediction… and System 4 maybe a FMEA System 5 System 6 System 7 Need to incorporate language that System 8 provides focus on reliability System 9 System 10 engineering activities System 11 – Thermal/Vibrations/Shock analyses System 12 System 13 – HALT System 14 – Solid FRACAS linked to design 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 Mean Time Between Failure (Hours) changes Contract is the most important • Reliability contract language document for ensuring that developed by AMSAA, OSD, and developers have the proper others incentives for applying their best • Scorecards also available to reliability and design engineering evaluate reliability risk teams 8
Leveraging Data and Information to the Maximum Extent Possible σ f Subsystem Strength Using Physics-Based- Reliability methodology to determine impacts of weight or mission changes for ground systems Field data from existing systems combined with engineering modeling
Reliability Growth and its Impact On Support Costs Idealized Curve Customer Test Initial DT LUT LUT Excursion IOT 300 $894 M $1,103 M $869 M Mean Time Between Failure 250 $1,701 M 215 CAP4 220 200 $2,457 M 175 CAP3 150 114 CAP2 100 CAP1 80 50 0 Test Time (Hours) CAP – Corrective Action Period 10
Linking Maintenance Data to Product Support Strategies Soldier Level Analysis Fleet Level Analysis Identify corrective actions Identify systemic issues Engine Idle Analysis Improve vehicle readiness & availability Reduce scheduled services Determine cause of incidents Influence RAM and vehicle RESET Vehicle Health Alerts Inform mission planning Improve vehicle design Exceedances Health Oil Life Analysis Usage Parts Fault Analysis Reliability Availability Developing business intelligence analytics to inform reliability and readiness decisions 11
Recommend
More recommend
